On Sun, Apr 24, 2016 at 12:47:15PM +0800, Drew Parsons wrote:
> > ferari
> ...
> > syfi
> > ufc
> > viper
>
> These (and uflacs) are deprecated. Actually I don't know what syfi is,
> it's not a current FENiCS package upstream. Precursor to ufc maybe,
> which was a precursor to ffc. Likewise viper isn't FENiCS upstream now.
>
> I'm in favour of leaving them in svn so they don't get us confused.
>
>
> > also consider that due to the way svn-buildpackage works, the debian
> > tags are not in the master branch, but if you have some of what I
> > personally call basic knowledge of git it won't be a issue :)
> >
> > Now, for all of those packages, it wouldn't seriously harm doing an
> > uploads cleaning them up a bit and whatnot (several of them are out
> > of
> > testing due to RC bugs, etc...), and changing Vcs-Git.
>
> I can clean up the current core packages (apart from mshr). The
> deprecated ones can bitrot :)
meh.
if a package is not needed anymore, deprecated or whatnot, the right
course of action is to remove it from the archive.
Leaving something to bitrot, without giving a shit about what happens to
that package is a very good way to rise the wrath of several people,
with no gain for you or the package.
If those packages are not needed anymore, please file a RM bug on them,
and delete the git repositories, otherwise, please maintain your
packages!
> I want to set the petsc-dev dependency in dolfin to petsc3.6-dev.
are you talking about the build-dep or the dependency of libdolfin-dev?
> python-dolfin calls on petsc-dev at execution (the dolfin scripts are
> like "just-in-time" interpreted scripts), so I think the petsc invoked
> at runtime should be consistent with the one that libdolfin1.6 is
> compiled against (currently petsc3.6). i.e. I think we want ABI
> consistency. Otherwise we could be in a position where petsc3.8 is
> pulled in at runtime while libdolfin1.6 still uses petsc3.6.
well, you named all binaries packages that are built from the same
source, so this is very much not a issue.
Also, if you for some reason want petsc3.6-dev in the build-dep, then
*you* have to take care for it after every petsc transition, instead I
had to do it some days ago to finally decruft petsc and slepc, as dolfin
was the very last package holding them back.
I don't think you need to specify the version in the build-dep: if I'm
not having it wrong (with a very quick glance) this is a level 1
dependency for petsc, so there is no risk of building against something
that is built with a differnt petsc' ABI.
And if you need to specify the version of the dependency of
libdolfin-dev, please compute that at build time and use a substvar to
put it in the dep.
And if this not the case, then dolfin ought to check for it at build
time and fail, and at run time and fail, early.
Versioned -dev packages are just a pain for transitions, as they require
sourceful uploads of the rdeps, with usually basically no gain
whatsoever, think a couple more times before using them, and if you do,
please be prepared at receiving RC bugs anytime and peple NMUing your
packages to change them if you don't do timely do it.
--
regards,
Mattia Rizzolo
GPG Key: 66AE 2B4A FCCF 3F52 DA18 4D18 4B04 3FCD B944 4540 .''`.
more about me: https://mapreri.org : :' :
Launchpad user: https://launchpad.net/~mapreri `. `'`
Debian QA page: https://qa.debian.org/developer.php?login=mattia `-
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature